Reading Mill at SXSW

I was in Austin, Texas, over spring break, attending the South by Southwest music festival, and I came to the conclusion that Columbia (specifically the Core Curriculum) ruins you.

I say this because, in the middle of a show last Wednesday, while I was people-watching to kill time between bands, J.S. Mill popped into my head. I was staring at the various members of different “scenes” who made up the crowd—hardcore punks, greasers (yes, they still exist), hippies, skinheads, metalheads, hipsters, crust punks, and, for lack of a better word, indie kids—and started to consider Mill’s emphasis on the importance of individuality as a source of progress in his essay “On Liberty” (I had been reading it on the plane to Austin the day before). Aside from making me want to kick my own ass, this consideration led me to ask a few questions.

Firstly, what did placement in one of these scenes tell me about any of these people? And, secondly, is there anything wrong with people defining themselves, and inviting others to define them (through their comformity in appearances and actions), as members of this or that “group”?

Take hardcore punks, for example. If you self-identify as a punk, and wear the same skinny jeans, Misfits t-shirt, and leather jacket as other hardcore punks, what does that tell me about you? Well, aside from assuming what music you listen to, I can also assume (or at least suspect) that you have nihilistic tendencies, believe to some degree in non-conformity (irony noted), possess a DIY ethic, and are perhaps not someone who shies away from the occassional fight. And I can also assume that you want me to draw such conclusions (or similar ones) from your appearance.
What I can’t assume is which came first—your punk aesthetic or nihilistic tendencies. And this is where my second question comes in: is there anything wrong with defining yourself as, and dressing like, a hardcore punk (or a member of any other larger “group”)?

The answer, I think, is that it’s perfectly fine as long as the reasons for doing so are your own. In other words, if you were drawn to the punk scene because you found some of your own ideas and feelings mirrored in the music, and if you were then introduced to nihilism or the DIY ethic, and realized that these philosophies fit well with your conception of the world, defining yourself as a hardcore punk would be a natural next step. If, however, you found yourself drawn to the music, immediately self-defined as a hardcore punk, and then adopted nihilism and a DIY ethic simply because that’s what other hardcore punks were doing—without stopping to consider whether these ideologies accorded with your own analysis of life and society—then being a punk would be a negative thing, and wrong for you.

Of course, it might seem that choosing hardcore punk (a relatively small group with a very specific list of common ideals) as a case study is an easy way out, but the same logic applies to almost every way members of our generation choose to define themselves. Are you a Democrat because you believe the healthcare bill (among other things) should be passed? Or do you believe the healthcare bill should be passed because you’re a Democrat? Are you in a sorority because you believe in the values of sisterhood and community service, and truly identify with the other people in that sorority? Or do you engage in community service and dress like your sorority sisters because you are a member of that sorority? Are you a hippie because you are a pacifist and a believer in free love? Or do you profess to believe in free love and pacifisim because you think hippie girls are hot?

I guess the point I’m trying to make here, and the conclusion I came to while waiting for that band to tune their guitars at SXSW, is that there is nothing wrong with projecting—through your appearances, actions, or words—your membership in a larger, pre-defined group. Human beings are too similar, share too many concerns, to be completely individual in every aspect of life. We also all share a common desire to be part of something large, not to be alone. If you are lucky enough to find a handful of people who have the same beliefs and likes as you—beliefs and likes arived at through the use of your own reason and sentiment—then some degree of mutual conformity is harmless.

That is, of course, as long as those beliefs do not lead to actions which harm anyone else. But that’s a different idea of Mill’s, and one which I’ll save for another column (or concert).

Neil FitzPatrick is a Columbia College sophomore. Excuses and Half-truths runs alternate Tuesdays.